This is fracking unbelievable, restart the gravy train, Leitrim to the rescue

deCourcey chick · 11-05-2012 02:23PM

Preliminary environmental assessment raport performed by univ of Aberdeen for the EPA is available http://www.epa.ie/downloads/pubs/research/sss/UniAberdeen_FrackingReport.pdf

pcworldisajoke · 28-08-2012 01:58AM

deCourcey chick wrote: »

Preliminary environmental assessment raport performed by univ of Aberdeen for the EPA is available http://www.epa.ie/downloads/pubs/research/sss/UniAberdeen_FrackingReport.pdf

University of Aberdeen has been in the pay of big oil for over 30 years. Its not a conspiracy, its a pretty well documented fact. I won't spew a load of links at you, just the one from the university itself. They are heavily funded by Shell and Halliburton.
http://www.abdn.ac.uk/mediareleases/release.php?id=410

The Irish times made the point in February (ctrl+f aberdeen)
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2012/0206/1224311334943.html

meanwhile back at the ranch-

Another major lawsuit on Fracking in the US-

http://www.arkansasbusiness.com/article.aspx?aID=132480

Fracking is simply unsafe- anyone who says otherwise has a vested interest. The evidence is everywhere. Bans from across the world, and Pat Rabbite has the nerve/corrupted gall to say there's a study being done for the EPA at the University of Aberdeen, and alot of weight for decisions will come from that 'study'?

Every day you lose more faith in our government.

pcworldisajoke · 28-08-2012 02:19AM

Just reading back through alot of the posts on this, and it always comes back to whether it's safe/unsafe, or 'has there been academic research etc. done to say its harmful/not harmful'?. This always makes me laugh, (otherwise i'd cry).

it's fairly intuitive when you think about it, contaminated water is ALWAYS going to escape;

1. Pumping millions of litres of water to BREAK UP shale formations at high pressure = never knowing where alot of the water will go when it does the required BREAKING up of the shale formations;

2. So massive cracks and fissures mean water has places to go, and it WILL go where it can. There's no way to get all or even MOST of the water back up the pipe. At the end of that pipe, the pressure comes out and there's never going to be equivalent pressure to push it back up, because the space has been enlarged. So some water comes back up the outsides (as well as inside) of the pipehigher up the strata, and goes down the broken fissures/newly created spaces into god knows how many watertables etc.

It's really a no brainer. And we're seeing the results of Fracking in the MASSIVE amounts of lawsuits all over the US.

The disinformation brigade are going to be out in full force when the prices start to rise again, we have to be ready to fight.

It's not safe. Simple as that. If our government let this happen, that'll be two treasonous governments in a row the Irish electorate have put in power. We're not the best judges of character are we?.

gara · 28-08-2012 02:19AM

The King of Moo wrote: »

I'm not normally one to jump to the defence of large corporations, they did actually find the gas, not the government, so I don't think it's such a bad deal

If a thief enters your home in the middle of the night and finds 500 euro, does it suddenly become theirs? Irish gas should equal mainly Irish profits!

--Kaiser-- · 28-08-2012 08:32AM

gara wrote: »

If a thief enters your home in the middle of the night and finds 500 euro, does it suddenly become theirs? Irish gas should equal mainly Irish profits!

Moronic analogy.
They're not thieves, they are legally searching for resources (there's nothing stopping the Irish governemnt doing this either...except that it's incredibly expensive). Furthermore, extracting the gas requires time, effort and yes, even more money.

Better to let someone else find it and then tax them on the profits

nedzer2011 · 28-08-2012 10:14AM

pcworldisajoke wrote: »

University of Aberdeen has been in the pay of big oil for over 30 years. Its not a conspiracy, its a pretty well documented fact. I won't spew a load of links at you, just the one from the university itself. They are heavily funded by Shell and Halliburton.
http://www.abdn.ac.uk/mediareleases/release.php?id=410

The Irish times made the point in February (ctrl+f aberdeen)
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2012/0206/1224311334943.html

meanwhile back at the ranch-

Another major lawsuit on Fracking in the US-

http://www.arkansasbusiness.com/article.aspx?aID=132480

Fracking is simply unsafe- anyone who says otherwise has a vested interest. The evidence is everywhere. Bans from across the world, and Pat Rabbite has the nerve/corrupted gall to say there's a study being done for the EPA at the University of Aberdeen, and alot of weight for decisions will come from that 'study'?

Every day you lose more faith in our government.

A valid point here - but you have to remember that Universities like Aberdeen, while they may have links with oil companies, do in turn have, by far, the greatest (and possibly the only valid) expertise/experience in exploration/hydraulic fracturing.

This is quite likely the reason they were chosen to perform the study. I'm not trying to say that the financial dependence on oil companies is not an issue... but just because you appoint a seemingly unbiased university to undertake a study doesn't necessarily mean that you will get the best results.

meenaghman · 28-08-2012 11:23AM

BX 19 wrote: »

I don't think you understand how this "fracking" operation works. You only need enough fluid to open up a fracture within the rocks. This depends on the geology of the area - shale is ideal as fractures tend to run across horizontal bedding plains where the poppant (which is the stuff left behind from the hydraulic fracturing fluid, typically something like sintered bauxite or a ceramic material) supports this fracture open so the gas can flow out.

You really do not need to inject fracking fluids along the entire area of the gas field.

Prepared to admit my initial sums were off. But not quite sure of your argument. Tamboran have stated they're going to drill between 3000 and 9000 wells.

10 million litres * 3000 = 30 billion litres.
10 million litres * 9000 = 90 billion litres.

Volume of water in Upper Lough McNean =~ 60billion Litres. So effectively they require fracking fluid in the order of between .5 and 1.5 times the amount of water in Upper Lough McNean. Ie 'the enough fluid to open up a fracture within the rocks' is cumulatively a large amount.

Between 1/4 and 1/2 of this fluid remains downhole so effectively removing that water from the water cycle.
The remainder comes back up to the surface. Tamboran are claiming that they can use a process developed by Ecosphere. I'm not sure, due to the large amounts of minerals in the water in Leitrim and Fermanagh. At any rate the water will have to be treated before they send it down hole and then the flowback water needs to be either retreated (No idea of how many times it can be reused) or stored.

Its interesting to note that the only Shale Gas well so far drilled and fracked in the UK still has stored water contained on site.. so if this stuff is that easy to get rid of, I'm a bit confused why its still sitting there and Tamboran state that the UK is more switched on to oil and gas industry. We're unsure of the radioactivity of these shales.. Shales by their nature will have higher radioactivity - and we know that radon gas is an issue in the locality. In general there are other chemicals such as Benzene found in the vicinity of hydro carbons which will wash back up with the flowback water - Benzene's toxicity requires less than 5 parts per billion to be considered safe. ie 5Litres/Billion Litres or 5000ml/billion Litres = 5ml / million litres or a teaspoon / million litres !!!.

True Agricultural run off causes pollution - but building 7 acre concrete pads with lorrys will also cause major run-off problems (highlighted in the recent Pacific report). Even silt blocking up streams (there'll be a lot of sand involved in this operations) will severely disrupt the local eco-balance.

I see you trust the EPA completely. However the EPA is immune from prosecution and has made it clear it want's to facilitate business.
Finally its worth noting that neither governments North or South have written an SEA (Strategic Environmental Assessment) before issuing these licences as required to under EU law, which shows a complete disregard for the people affected, and a lack of understanding of high volume slick water hydraulic fracturing.

AnonoBoy · 28-08-2012 11:31AM

As far as I understand from my source inside the EPA fracking in Ireland is subject to much stricter regulations than fracking in the US.

shampon · 28-08-2012 11:35AM

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Inb4 shell2sea bullshít or that propoganda tripe "my oil and gas" video

If anything the money from the gas and oil should go to the ancestors of prehistoric animals. Shell to Sea rarely if ever admit this.

pcworldisajoke · 28-08-2012 12:16PM

AnonoBoy wrote: »

As far as I understand from my source inside the EPA fracking in Ireland is subject to much stricter regulations than fracking in the US.

How do you regulate that amount of fluid?

how do you regulate above ground spills?

How do you regulate what happens 100-600 metres below the ground? Will we put mini-leprechauns down there in hard hats crawling outside pipes, and at the end of pipes, looking to see where the chemicals go? And then when the leprechauns find where the chemical fluid escaped, will we send them a load of kitchen roll down the pipe for cleanup????

Leprechauns have been intentionally used here, to indicate you're living in a fantasy world.

gara · 28-08-2012 12:46PM

--Kaiser-- wrote: »

Moronic analogy.
They're not thieves, they are legally searching for resources (there's nothing stopping the Irish governemnt doing this either...except that it's incredibly expensive). Furthermore, extracting the gas requires time, effort and yes, even more money

Moronic response. Exploitation of natural resources by huge corporations is precisely what's left most of the Middle East in turmoil

Mycroft H · 28-08-2012 12:48PM

gara wrote: »

Moronic response. Exploitation of natural resources by huge corporations is precisely what's left most of the Middle East in turmoil

There is more to it then just that.

CruelCoin · 28-08-2012 01:18PM

Rabidlamb wrote: »

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/finance/2012/0201/1224311046794.html?via=mr

The good.

The seemingly good but on second read, not so much.

Summary:
Private firm find €55 billion woth of gas in Leitrim.
Irish government only gets 10%, if we're lucky.

And?

Were the government to do it themselves they'd fail miserably.

For examples you need only look at every single nationalised oil/gas company to see the levels of corruption/mismanagement that ensues.

--Kaiser-- · 28-08-2012 01:18PM

gara wrote: »

Moronic response. Exploitation of natural resources by huge corporations is precisely what's left most of the Middle East in turmoil

Face, meet palm

gara · 28-08-2012 01:39PM

BX 19 wrote: »

There is more to it then just that.

There certainly is but the extraction of oil and gas by large MNC's has played a pivotal role in creating widescale problems. The onus should be on the Irish government to put this enterprise to tender and market it properly, as opposed to their typical laissez faire attitude that's bankrupted us.

How can we ever achieve optimum economic growth if we continue to outsource our most profitable ventures?

--Kaiser-- wrote: »

Face, meet palm

Sterling response

pcworldisajoke · 28-08-2012 02:34PM

CruelCoin wrote: »

And?

Were the government to do it themselves they'd fail miserably.

For examples you need only look at every single nationalised oil/gas company to see the levels of corruption/mismanagement that ensues.

Chavez aint doing too bad, despite the recent explosion. ( probably caused by outside agents sending him a message)

And while there may be corruption elsewhere- privatised oil companies are THE most corrupt institutions on the planet. They destroy everything in their wake and clean nothing up after themselves (ecuador legal fight recently for example involving Chevron). They're currently trying to buy an election in the US through A.L.E..C. and funding Romney through the Koch brothers (openly).

So please, let's not let anyone be under any illusions that corruption only comes from state managed companies!!!!!

pcworldisajoke · 28-08-2012 02:37PM

gara wrote: »

There certainly is but the extraction of oil and gas by large MNC's has played a pivotal role in creating widescale problems. The onus should be on the Irish government to put this enterprise to tender and market it properly, as opposed to their typical laissez faire attitude that's bankrupted us.

How can we ever achieve optimum economic growth if we continue to outsource our most profitable ventures?

Sterling response

agree with all of this. Except I don't think it's laissez faire attitudes that will ruin us- if this goes ahead (just like the other oil licenses that are raping us at present) it will be entirely due to corruption in our government, and a large wedge going into a numbered account somewhere, or a nice consulting position guaranteed after being voted from office. I have NO faith in our politicians-they're not acting in our interests so they must be getting something for themselves.

The wishy-washiness of Pat Rabbite ( on the EPA study/ on the recent letter from the EU etc.) has only exacerbated my feelings on this.

AnonoBoy · 28-08-2012 02:37PM

pcworldisajoke wrote: »

How do you regulate that amount of fluid?

how do you regulate above ground spills?

How do you regulate what happens 100-600 metres below the ground? Will we put mini-leprechauns down there in hard hats crawling outside pipes, and at the end of pipes, looking to see where the chemicals go? And then when the leprechauns find where the chemical fluid escaped, will we send them a load of kitchen roll down the pipe for cleanup????

Leprechauns have been intentionally used here, to indicate you're living in a fantasy world.

How do I do it? I'm not going to do anything buddy. Just reporting what I was told by a member of the EPA. I'm sure some regulation is better than none but then again I'm sure you have loads of scientific qualifications and aren't just basing all your knowledge on stuff you read online.

But again I'm not the one stating anything about this, only telling you what the he scientifically-qualified PhD-holding member of the EPA told me.

Perhaps you should address your questions to them as opposed to ranting in an extremely irritating and condescending manner on boards to people who couldn't give a flying f*ck what you think anyway?

pcworldisajoke · 28-08-2012 02:42PM

AnonoBoy wrote: »

How do I do it? I'm not going to do anything buddy. Just reporting what I was told by a member of the EPA. I'm sure some regulation is better than none but then again I'm sure you have loads of scientific qualifications and aren't just basing all your knowledge on stuff you read online.

But again I'm not the one stating anything about this, only telling you what the he scientifically-qualified PhD-holding member of the EPA told me.

Perhaps you should address your questions to them as opposed to ranting in an extremely irritating and condescending manner on boards?

I apologise if i seemed condescending, i was joking a bit.

But seriously- nothing is ever regulated right in this country- it's one of the most bent countries on the planet.

My point in a nutshell is- you can't regulate the un-regulateable (if that's a word). Throw in corruption and the lack of any decent regulatory track-record in this contry, and it's all doomed to fail, and we'll pay for the consequences, long after shareholder value was maximised. Sounds like something in the past 6 years doesn't it?

You cannot regulate what you can't control.

(ps- i see you edited your post to include the word *f*ck) -Bravo..

AnonoBoy · 28-08-2012 02:46PM

pcworldisajoke wrote: »

You cannot regulate what you can't control.

You can regulate what you can control though. So I presume they'll regulate those bits that are controllable.

I don't really know enough about it to answer your questions. Again, I'm just saying what I was told by a member of the EPA. Have you thought of emailing some state body like that instead of asking people on the internet?

(ps- i see you edited your post to include the word *f*ck) -Bravo..

I edited it to include other words too. Read them all together. It's called a sentence. It carries meaning.

Hey! You learned a new thing!

CruelCoin · 28-08-2012 02:55PM

pcworldisajoke wrote: »

Chavez aint doing too bad, despite the recent explosion. ( probably caused by outside agents sending him a message)

And while there may be corruption elsewhere- privatised oil companies are THE most corrupt institutions on the planet. They destroy everything in their wake and clean nothing up after themselves (ecuador legal fight recently for example involving Chevron). They're currently trying to buy an election in the US through A.L.E..C. and funding Romney through the Koch brothers (openly).

So please, let's not let anyone be under any illusions that corruption only comes from state managed companies!!!!!

I did mention levels of corruption.

State companies, especially oil and gas tend to go through a cycle.

1: private company makes obscene profit
2: state privatises under "dey tuk ur jebs!" mentality
3: state company missmanages, output falls, industry fails
4: private company is begged to take over the mess
5: repeat steps 1 through 4 ad infinitum.

Chavez may not be doing too badly now, but only after three or so of the above sequences. You can hardly give him an A on his report card for eventually getting it somewhat ok...

As for funding; how is oil company support for politicians any different from trade union support, farmer support, etc etc? They are all pitching for their own corner and the oil companies are entitled to pitch theirs along with everyone else.

pcworldisajoke · 28-08-2012 04:54PM

Cruiel Coin, i kind of get where youre coming from, but you can't align trade unions and farmers support for politicians in the same statosphere as Big Oil/Big energy. You just can't. First of all- trade unions and farmers don't put nearly as much money into campaigns. Second of all, Big oil/energy has a far worse impact when they are allowed do what they want- which they tend to be allowed do when their candidates get into office. The negative influence Big Oil exerts is on a whole different level of destruction and deception compared to anything farmers and trade unions would do (or want to do).

(here's a quick example of what Enbridge (a more damning spillage record you couldn't find in the pipeline industry) are trying in order to get a pipeline installed in disastrously risky areas - they made 1000 km2 of islands disappear!) This is the deception we're up against).

These are the same people who put the likes of Bush in power. In 2005 the Bush administration with Cheney as Vice president exempted Fracking for the first time from oversight of the Federal EPA, via legislation.
This legislation meant that states were now responsible on a local level for oversight. The amount of states that had huge deficits at that stage meant only one thing - it would be easier for Frackers to do what they wanted. State level environmental protection was so small it was virtually non-existant, and most of the states needed the money so Bush and Cheney knew exactly how easy it would be to start Fracking.

So here's the kicker- Halliburton were huge campaign financiers for Bush, and were leaders in Fracking 'technology' and had a commanding lead in infrastructure resources to get Fracking contracts. Of course, they had an in with many of the state governors, what with good old Dick Cheney at the helm. Cheney was a massive Shareholder in Halliburton, and had been their CEO before entering office, and is back working for them now since leaving office.

If Romney gets in, they said they'd roll back clean air standards, and open up the arctic for drilling- despite the EPA now stopping Shell at the last minute because their safety plans are woefully inept (even though their ships are in the Arctic).

The point here is that Big Oil/Energy companies are buying democracy worldwide, and it's to the detriment of all people except their executives and government bought-and-paid for pawns. I fear some of our 'leaders' are already part of that list. Either way, the oil lobby is quite far removed from the trade Unions. They symbolise everything wrong with our current headlong rush towards ruining everything of true worth.

This is fracking unbelievable, restart the gravy train, Leitrim to the rescue

Comments